Cover not available
Part of
Field Research on Translation and Interpreting
Edited by Regina Rogl, Daniela Schlager and Hanna Risku
[Benjamins Translation Library 165] 2025
► pp. 200–225

Chapter 9
Co-constructing cognitive artifacts in the translation workplace

ORCID logo | Stockholm University
This chapter concerns collaboration in the translation workplace, specifically the joint construction of a central workplace resource, a client guidelines document, by two translators. Using conversation analysis, the moment-to-moment interaction between the translators is analysed as they engage in decision making with regard to the contents of the document. Considered from the perspective of distributed cognition, the decision-making process is distributed between the participants through their interaction with each other and with material artifacts. The analysis shows how decisions about how to resolve epistemic uncertainty emerge interactively, how material resources are made relevant in the decision-making process, and how authority is jointly constructed. The chapter also discusses how the collaborative document revision contributes to the development of the cultural-cognitive ecosystem of the workplace.
Keywords: distributed cognition, conversation analysis, cognitive artifact, workplace ethnography, cultural-cognitive ecosystem
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous research
  • 3.Theoretical framework
    • 3.1Distributed cognition
    • 3.2Cognitive artifacts and ecosystems
  • 4.Method and data
    • 4.1Methodology
      • 4.1.1Conversation analysis
      • 4.1.2Institutional interaction
    • 4.2Data
      • 4.2.1The workplace
      • 4.2.2Participants and activity
      • 4.2.3CSG documents
      • 4.2.4The audio data
  • 5.Analysis
  • 6.Discussion
    • 6.1Joint decision making as a distributed cognitive process
    • 6.2Co-constructing the cognitive ecosystem
  • 7.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (55)
References
Alves, Fabio, and Arnt Lykke Jakobsen. 2021. “Grounding Cognitive Translation Studies: Goals, Commitments and Challenges.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ed. by Fabio Alves, and Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, 545–554. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Angelelli, Claudia. 2004. Medical Interpreting and Cross-cultural Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arvola, Mattias. 2020. “Ett multimodalt perspektiv på kognition” [A Multimodal Perspective on Cognition]. In Multimodal interaktionsanalys [Multimodal Interaction Analysis], ed. by Mathias Broth, and Leelo Keevallik, 235–250. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Bowker, Lynne. 2022. “Computer-assisted translation and interpreting tools.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Methodology, ed. by Federico Zanettin, and Christopher Rundle, 382–409. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Broth, Mathias, and Leelo Keevallik. 2020. “Multimodal interaktionsanalys — att studera mänskligt samspel” [Multimodal Interaction Analysis — Studying Human Interaction]. In Multimodal interaktionsanalys [Multimodal Interaction Analysis], ed. by Mathias Broth, and Leelo Keevallik, 19–40. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Broth, Mathias, Nigel Musk, and Rasmus Persson. 2020. “Inspelning och analys av interaktionsdata” [Recording and Analyzing Interaction Data]. In Multimodal interaktionsanalys [Multimodal Interaction Analysis], ed. by Mathias Broth, and Leelo Keevallik, 41–74. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Bundgaard, Kristine. 2017. “(Post-)Editing — A Workplace Study of Translator-Computer Interaction at Textminded Danmark A/S.” Doctoral dissertation, Aarhus University.
Bundgaard, Kristine, and Tina Paulsen Christensen. 2019. “Is the Concordance Feature the New Black? A Workplace Study of Translators’ Interaction with Translation Resources while Post-editing TM and MT Matches.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 31: 14–37.Google Scholar
Christensen, Tina Paulsen, Marian Flanagan, and Anne Schjoldager. 2017. “Mapping Translation Technology Research in Translation Studies. An Introduction to the Thematic Section.” Hermes 56: 7–20.Google Scholar
Dragsted, Barbara. 2008. “Computer-Aided Translation as a Distributed Cognitive Task.” In Cognition Distributed: How Cognitive Technology Extends Our Minds, ed. by Itiel E. Dror, and Stevan Harnad, 238–256. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen. 2021. “Translation, Ergonomics, and Cognition.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ed. by Fabio Alves, and Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, 147–160. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Garbis, Christer. 2002. “The Cognitive Use of Artifacts in Cooperative Process Management.” Doctoral dissertation, Linköping University.
Gavioli, Laura. 2015. “Conversation Analysis.” In Researching Translation and Interpreting, ed. by Claudia V. Angelelli, and Brian J. Baer, 189–194. London Routledge.Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra L. 2010. “Cognitive Translation Studies. Developments in Theory and Method.” In Translation and Cognition, ed. by Gregory Shreve, and Erik Angelone, 349–369. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
ten Have, Paul. 2007. Doing Conversation Analysis. 2nd edition. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 2004. “Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk. Analyzing Data.” In Qualitative Research. Theory, Method and Practice, 2nd edition, ed. by David Silverman, 222–245. London: Sage.Google Scholar
. 2012. “The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 30–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Epistemics in Conversation.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 370–394. Malden: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hirvonen, Maija. 2024. “Shared cognition in the translation process: Information processing and meaning production as interactive accomplishments.” Translation Studies. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hirvonen, Maija, and Liisa Tiittula. 2018. “How Are Translations Created? Using Multimodal Conversation Analysis to Study a Team Translation Process.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 17: 157–173.Google Scholar
Hollan, James, Edwin Hutchins, and David Kirsh. 2000. “Distributed Cognition: Towards a New Foundation for Human-Computer Interaction Research.” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 7 (2): 174–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, Edwin. 1995a. Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge & London: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1995b. “How a Cockpit Remembers Its Speed.” Cognitive Science 19 (3): 265–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. “Cognitive Artifacts.” In The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, ed. by Robert A. Wilson, and Frank C. Kiel, 126–127. Cambridge & London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2001. “Cognition, Distributed.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, ed. by Neil J. Smelser, and Paul B. Baltes, 2068–2072. Amsterdam: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “The Distributed Cognition Perspective on Human Interaction.” In Roots of Human Sociality. Culture, Cognition and Interaction, ed. by Nick J. Enfield, and Stephen C. Levinson, 375–398. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2008. “The Role of Cultural Practices in the Emergence of Modern Human Intelligence.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 363: 2011–2019. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. “Cognitive Ecology.” Topics in Cognitive Science 2: 705–715. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “The Cultural Ecosystem of Human Cognition.” Philosophical Psychology 27 (1): 34–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hvelplund, Kristian Tangsgaard. 2017. “Translators’ Use of Digital Resources During Translation.” Hermes 56: 71–87.Google Scholar
Karamanis, Nikiforos, Saturnino Luz, and Gavin Doherty. 2011. “Translation Practice in the Workplace: Contextual Analysis and Implications for Machine Translation.” Machine Translation 25: 35–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koester, Almut. 2006. Investigating Workplace Discourse. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Korhonen, Annamari, and Maija Hirvonen. 2021. “Joint creative process in translation: Socially distributed cognition in two production contexts.” Cognitive Linguistic Studies 8(2): 251–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Linell, Per. 2011. Samtalskulturer. Kommunikativa verksamhetstyper i samhället [Discourse Cultures. Communicative Activity Types in Society]. Vol. 1. Linköping: Institutionen för kultur och kommunikation, Linköpings universitet.Google Scholar
Menary, Richard, and Alexander Gillett. 2022. “The Tools of Enculturation.” Topics in Cognitive Science 14: 363–387. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. 2010. “On Paradigms and Cognitive Translatology.” In Translation and Cognition, ed. by Gregory Shreve, and Erik Angelone, 169–187. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “Reembedding Translation Process Research: An Introduction.” In Reembedding Translation Process Research, ed. by Ricardo Muñoz Martín, 1–20. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. “Looking Toward the Future of Cognitive Translation Studies.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ed. by John W. Schwieter, and Aline Ferreira, 555–572. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norman, Donald. 1993. Things that Make Us Smart. Defending Human Attributes in the Age of the Machine. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Norrthon, Stefan. 2020. “Teaterrepetitionens interaktion. Professionella praktiker i ett repetitionsarbete från manus till föreställning [The Interaction of a Theatre Rehearsal. Professional Practices in a Rehearsal Process from Script to Performance].” Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University.
O’Hagan, Minako (ed). 2019. The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Technology. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna. 2002. “Situatedness in Translation Studies.” Cognitive Systems Research 3 (3): 523–533. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna, and Regina Rogl. 2021. “Translation and Situated, Embodied, Distributed, Embedded, and Extended Cognition.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ed. by Fabio Alves, and Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, 478–499. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Risku, Hanna, and Florian Windhager. 2015. “Extended Translation. A Socio-cognitive Research Agenda.” In Interdisciplinarity in Translation and Interpreting Process Research, ed. by Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Susanne Göpferich, and Sharon O’Brien, 35–47. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna, Florian Windhager, and Matthias Apfelthaler. 2013. “A Dynamic Network Model of Translatorial Cognition and Action.” Translation Spaces 2: 151–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robbins, Philip, and Murat Aydede. 2009. “A Short Primer on Situated Cognition.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition, ed. by Philip Robbins, and Murat Aydede, 3–10. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rogl, Regina, and Hanna Risku. 2024. “Cognitive Artefacts and Boundary Objects: On the Changing Role of Tools in Translation Project Management.” In Translation, Interpreting and Technological Change: Innovations in Research, Practice and Training, ed. by Marion Winters, Sharon Deane-Cox, and Ursula Böser, 13–36. London: Bloomsbury Academic. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, Andrew, Joss Moorkens, María Fernández Parra, and Frank Austermuehl. 2023. Translation Tools and Technologies. London & New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sannholm, Raphael. 2021. “Translation, Teamwork, and Technology. The Use of Social and Material Scaffolds in the Translation Process.” Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University.
Sannholm, Raphael, and Hanna Risku. 2024. “Situated Minds and Distributed Systems in Translation. Exploring the Conceptual and Empirical Implications.” Target 36 (2): 159–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., and Harvey Sacks. 1973. “Opening up Closings.” In The Discourse Reader, ed. by Adam Jaworski, and Nikolas Coupland, 263–274. London & New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä. 2012. “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 45 (3): 297–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svennevig, Jan. 2012. “The Agenda as Resource for Topic Introduction in Workplace Meetings.” Discourse Studies 14 (1): 53–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as Interaction. London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar